Is the Chinese JH-7 an Answer to the Pakistan Air Force’s Deep Strike Needs?

[princefaisal]

For replacement of 170+ Mirages, at least 100 aircrafts need to be procured. Operating/maintenance cost for single engine aircraft will be lower than twin-engine aircraft. So as per info regarding payload capacity, speed & latest avionics, J-10 with 7000kg payload and Mach 2.2 speed will be best suited than JF-17 in attack role.

 

[Enigma SIG]

Brother, i didnt mean we need deep strike aircraft, what i meant was to have a platform like J-16 to be used as a launch platform for carrying a couple of long range CMs (~1500 km). Check this article out. The idea is gaining ground already.

Unless you have weapons in your inventory that can be carried by capable aircraft you're not going to see said aircraft being flown by PAF. I don't think we have any CM's above the range of 800KM; and going by the The Drive article, they're discussing JASSM-ER integration with F-15Js with ranges of 500 miles. You'll have to get a similar weapons system for this to be feasible. That also means altering many war games scenarios to offensive for many squadrons, if you have the required number of platforms required for such an exercise.

 

[Shah_Deu]

Unless you have weapons in your inventory that can be carried by capable aircraft you're not going to see said aircraft being flown by PAF. I don't think we have any CM's above the range of 800KM;

You are right. Thats why i said we need to realign our priorities for a full offensive doctrine once the other side inititates, there should be no place to hide in their land. A CM with 1500 km is nothing out of this world. If we can get what we already have then this should be a piece of cake!

A Mumbai for Karachi, Delhi for Islamabad, Bangalore for Lahore and Chennai for Quetta strategy is the need of the hour. Just the idea of losing a couple of RSS Shakas (Regional Offices) deep inside MadhiyaPradesh and UtterPradesh pinpointedly for the next Balakot like strike would be enough.

As i said, its all about adding more steps to- and fine tuning the escalatory ladder. and a long range ALCM would provide us with just that.

I am afraid, just relying on strategic assets is not going to work for us much longer brother! We need to raise the cost in conventional domain as well and that too over much of their territory and with pinpoint accuracy, so we are able to take out just enough what we need (strategic oil reserves, ports, Nashik facility etc etc) and save more surprizes for the next round! My opinion!

 

[Enigma SIG]

You are right. Thats why i said we need to realign our priorities for a full offensive doctrine once the other side inititates, there should be no place to hide in their land. A CM with 1500 km is nothing out of this world. If we can get what we already have then this should be a piece of cake!

A Mumbai for Karachi, Delhi for Islamabad, Bangalore for Lahore and Chennai for Quetta strategy is the need of the hour.

As i said, its all about adding more steps to- and fine tuning the escalatory ladder. and a long range ALCM would provide us with just that.

Just relying on nuclear threats is not going to work for much longer brother! We need to raise the cost in conventional domain as well and that too over much of their territory! My opinion!

I think we know due to Feb Pak/Ind episode that Pakistan can alter its defensive stance to offensive if the situation demands it. I'd worry more about the intel India gathers through is military satellites. Pakistan can get those from China's satellites but it would be best if we have something in-house.

 

[litman]

can this or any 4th gen survive a defending force comprising of su 30 , mirage 2000, rafale, mig 29 and s400 while carrying out a deep strike into india???? definitely NO. so JH 7 is not an answer to any question. at present and in near future deep strikes will only b carried out by ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.

 

[Armchair]

Again something what Mirage does.
Yes basic assumptions but should give a idea on why JH-7 case for PAF is over hyped.
As a Missile truck for cruise missiles PN is working on a better solution and for PAF the J-10 makes better sense. And if we wait it out Azm will offer a low observable and more survivable strike option.

When the assumption is faulty, how can it give u good measure?

They mask the real capability that the JH-7 brings. A capability not available with F-16s or any other aircraft u mentioned. No one will be flying strike operations at cruise speed at 300 FL.

By bringing these basic and meaningless to the discussion measures, you mask the strength and purpose of the JH-7 and then draw down to the same ol' "that is why PAF didn't get".

Which really is mindless, oversimplified and reaches false conclusions.

At a time when India is looking to hurt Pakistan, having dumb retorts and solutions hurt Pakistan too. If PAF had strong offensive assets, IAF would fear a strike on Mumbai. India would have something more to lose with war.
But thanks to the kind of one dimensional thinking demonstrated, PAF holds no such strike cards.

 

[Shabi1]

When the assumption is faulty, how can it give u good measure?

They mask the real capability that the JH-7 brings. A capability not available with F-16s or any other aircraft u mentioned. No one will be flying strike operations at cruise speed at 300 FL.

By bringing these basic and meaningless to the discussion measures, you mask the strength and purpose of the JH-7 and then draw down to the same ol' "that is why PAF didn't get".

Which really is mindless, oversimplified and reaches false conclusions.

At a time when India is looking to hurt Pakistan, having dumb retorts and solutions hurt Pakistan too. If PAF had strong offensive assets, IAF would fear a strike on Mumbai. India would have something more to lose with war.
But thanks to the kind of one dimensional thinking demonstrated, PAF holds no such strike cards.

27th Feb Swift retort??????

FYI
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-...ina-seeking-offload-surplus-military-aircraft

 

[The Raven]

When the assumption is faulty, how can it give u good measure?

They mask the real capability that the JH-7 brings. A capability not available with F-16s or any other aircraft u mentioned. No one will be flying strike operations at cruise speed at 300 FL.

By bringing these basic and meaningless to the discussion measures, you mask the strength and purpose of the JH-7 and then draw down to the same ol' "that is why PAF didn't get".

Which really is mindless, oversimplified and reaches false conclusions.

At a time when India is looking to hurt Pakistan, having dumb retorts and solutions hurt Pakistan too. If PAF had strong offensive assets, IAF would fear a strike on Mumbai. India would have something more to lose with war.
But thanks to the kind of one dimensional thinking demonstrated, PAF holds no such strike cards.

Completely inane arguments when both countries are developing ever more sophisticated and long range cruise missiles and stand-off weapons. The JH-7 may be suitable for a country like Bangladesh, but not the PAF.

 

[Aasimkhan]

J-10C is better than JH-7 with better range. We should go for J-16 which would be better than JH-7.

For sea operations twin engines are always a preference. To crash in sea is an aviators worst night mare. Two engines provide better survivability. But these are all things of the past. China is already delegating sea strike to long range missiles like DF21, DF26 and DF 41. Targetting can be done by satellites, UAVs or 5th gen stealth planes. Pakistan should consider these options now that the world is headed towards network-centric warfare.

When the assumption is faulty, how can it give u good measure?

They mask the real capability that the JH-7 brings. A capability not available with F-16s or any other aircraft u mentioned. No one will be flying strike operations at cruise speed at 300 FL.

By bringing these basic and meaningless to the discussion measures, you mask the strength and purpose of the JH-7 and then draw down to the same ol' "that is why PAF didn't get".

Which really is mindless, oversimplified and reaches false conclusions.

At a time when India is looking to hurt Pakistan, having dumb retorts and solutions hurt Pakistan too. If PAF had strong offensive assets, IAF would fear a strike on Mumbai. India would have something more to lose with war.
But thanks to the kind of one dimensional thinking demonstrated, PAF holds no such strike cards.

JH 7 is no more in production. JH 7 does not offer any significant capability enhancement than we already have other than being twin engine. Induction of a new plane is not a joke, it takes time, manpower (trained), financial resources etc etc. If at all we have to induct a twin engine I will vote for J 16 which can fly faster and further with more payload. Ideally I will try to cover the sea by newer technologies which are cheaper, cost effective and accurate.

 

[jupiter2007]

I am not sure why people keep bring it JH-7. It's 70s design and even China is not producing it anymore.... We should continue to improve our airforce by upgrading F-16s, JF-17 block 2 and Block 5, J-16 (or equivalent) and Azm project. We should continue to work with China to get the latest fighter. China is probably working on modify J-11/J-16 design. We should get involve in that project.

 

[Aasimkhan]

can this or any 4th gen survive a defending force comprising of su 30 , mirage 2000, rafale, mig 29 and s400 while carrying out a deep strike into india???? definitely NO. so JH 7 is not an answer to any question. at present and in near future deep strikes will only b carried out by ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.

JH 7s only defence (which is again questionable in hostile waters against strong air defences) is its low level flight using the earth's curvature against detection by radar.

 

[litman]

JH 7s only defence (which is again questionable in hostile waters against strong air defences) is its low level flight using the earth's curvature against detection by radar.

india has AWACS too which make this tactic very much useless.

PAF will be used only as a defensive air force or for strikes close to the border against advancing indian army coulmns. we cant risk losing already very few 4th gen jets that we have against a much bigger and well equipped air force. in a defensive mode PAF will have the advantage of AWACS, SAMs etc. secondly we dont have any money to buy any jet right now. so JH 7 is just a wet dream rather a stupid dream. get your priorities straight. we havent seen the peak of corona in pakistan. the already crippled economy is further going down the drain and we are talking about inducting JH7. crazy idea to start with.

 

[nascar 42]

Hello,

I am the author of the article being discussed. First of all, I would like to thank Zarvan for posting the article here to foster discussion. Secondly, I also appreciate comments made by Armchair, Foxtrot etc and other learned contributors who outlined flaws in the article's analysis.

Now to the most important part, I made an account on this forum just now as one of my close associates pointed out that one member accused me of 'stealing his posts verbatim.' I shall hence outline all my sources below so that the misunderstanding can be cleared.

1- The initial paragraph where I talk about the Rafale deal is taken from online editions of Indian newspapers. Hyperlinks are embedded for references. Please check

2- The part where I talk about the PL-15 out-ranging everything in India's arsenal (except Meteors) and Delhi's focus on platform acquisition vs Pak's emphasis on sensor upgrades is taken from here. https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...e-odds-against-the-elite-of-india-s-air-force. Also, https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...r-how-india-can-respond-to-regain-superiority

3- Information about aircraft inventory of the PAF and IAF is taken from 'List of Active Air Force Aircraft' from militaryfactory.com and details about their exact numbers were taken from the PAF's wikipedia page.

4- The part about frontline assets getting overstretched is common knowledge as the PAF has to operate limited capable aircraft across different battle zones.

5- About the part where i mention India's protracted coastline. This first got my attention after I read a post on quora regarding India's long coastline. Here is the post https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-...a-long-coastline?redirected_qid=1227795#!n=12

6- Details about specs of JH-7 are taken from two articles published by National Interest magazine. I include the hyperlink of one article in my piece. Please check.

7- Information about the Rolls Royce Spey engine is available on the wikipedia page as well as its advantages in low flight. Furthermore, the article below clearly about most engines today being configured for high altitude flight. https://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/who-says-a-jet-cant-be-cheap-24547164/

8- Details about the Buccaneer taken from http://www.airvectors.net/avbucc.html and Robert Jackson's book on fighter aircraft from 1914 to the present day. He clearly mentions the purpose was to design an aircraft capable of flying low below enemy ship radar horizon.

9- About the engine's durability, just check the Rolls Royce Spey wikipedia page. It clearly mentions the engine's use on Phantoms and its advantages.

10- The part where I talk about the Pak Navy's Area Denial is referenced from an article published by The Diplomat. I included this in form of an embedded hyperlink. Please check the paragraph

11-The part about Exocet missiles and their use in Falklands War is taken from a book by Max Hastings. I read this some years back and the idea was fascinating. The name of the book is The Battle for the Falklands.

12- Information about the JH-7's payload capacity is taken from the National Interest article I talk about above.

13- The part where I say cruise missiles can be shot down by the Su-30 is taken from here https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/su-30.htm. About the cruise missiles following a predictable trajectory and being vulnerable to interception. I read a quora post once which talked about intercepting cruise missiles. Here is the link https://www.quora.com/How-can-an-air-defense-system-intercept-cruise-missile

I hope this clears everything up. I wrote the article as I was myself fascinated by the idea of JH-7 in the PAF. I do remember watching a youtube video sometime back on the aircraft which got me more interested so i decided to pen a piece. Also, it is entirely possible that other members have thought about the same stuff I mention in the article but I believe this to be a case of 'Parallel Thinking' or multiple discovery. It is entirely possible for two people (or more) to reach the same conclusion without interacting. One example of this is how ancient societies developed agriculture independent of each other.

Please do go through the sources I have listed as they cover the entire article. Also, the editorial process at many international publications is very thorough and they check submissions before publishing. So, one cannot copy posts verbatim and present them in shape of an article.

Finally, I would like to respectfully say to all forum members here that you guys are most probably better aware of military matters than I am. Please do critique what I have written but kindly refrain from accusing me of stealing posts.

Thank You

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Hello,

I am the author of the article being discussed. First of all, I would like to thank Zarvan for posting the article here to foster discussion. Secondly, I also appreciate comments made by Armchair, Foxtrot etc and other learned contributors who outlined flaws in the article's analysis.

Now to the most important part, I made an account on this forum just now as one of my close associates pointed out that one member accused me of 'stealing his posts verbatim.' I shall hence outline all my sources below so that the misunderstanding can be cleared.

1- The initial paragraph where I talk about the Rafale deal is taken from online editions of Indian newspapers. Hyperlinks are embedded for references. Please check

2- The part where I talk about the PL-15 out-ranging everything in India's arsenal (except Meteors) and Delhi's focus on platform acquisition vs Pak's emphasis on sensor upgrades is taken from here. https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...e-odds-against-the-elite-of-india-s-air-force. Also, https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...r-how-india-can-respond-to-regain-superiority

3- Information about aircraft inventory of the PAF and IAF is taken from 'List of Active Air Force Aircraft' from militaryfactory.com and details about their exact numbers were taken from the PAF's wikipedia page.

4- The part about frontline assets getting overstretched is common knowledge as the PAF has to operate limited capable aircraft across different battle zones.

5- About the part where i mention India's protracted coastline. This first got my attention after I read a post on quora regarding India's long coastline. Here is the post https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-...a-long-coastline?redirected_qid=1227795#!n=12

6- Details about specs of JH-7 are taken from two articles published by National Interest magazine. I include the hyperlink of one article in my piece. Please check.

7- Information about the Rolls Royce Spey engine is available on the wikipedia page as well as its advantages in low flight. Furthermore, the article below clearly about most engines today being configured for high altitude flight. https://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/who-says-a-jet-cant-be-cheap-24547164/

8- Details about the Buccaneer taken from http://www.airvectors.net/avbucc.html and Robert Jackson's book on fighter aircraft from 1914 to the present day. He clearly mentions the purpose was to design an aircraft capable of flying low below enemy ship radar horizon.

9- About the engine's durability, just check the Rolls Royce Spey wikipedia page. It clearly mentions the engine's use on Phantoms and its advantages.

10- The part where I talk about the Pak Navy's Area Denial is referenced from an article published by The Diplomat. I included this in form of an embedded hyperlink. Please check the paragraph

11-The part about Exocet missiles and their use in Falklands War is taken from a book by Max Hastings. I read this some years back and the idea was fascinating. The name of the book is The Battle for the Falklands.

12- Information about the JH-7's payload capacity is taken from the National Interest article I talk about above.

13- The part where I say cruise missiles can be shot down by the Su-30 is taken from here https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/su-30.htm. About the cruise missiles following a predictable trajectory and being vulnerable to interception. I read a quora post once which talked about intercepting cruise missiles. Here is the link https://www.quora.com/How-can-an-air-defense-system-intercept-cruise-missile

I hope this clears everything up. I wrote the article as I was myself fascinated by the idea of JH-7 in the PAF. I do remember watching a youtube video sometime back on the aircraft which got me more interested so i decided to pen a piece. Also, it is entirely possible that other members have thought about the same stuff I mention in the article but I believe this to be a case of 'Parallel Thinking' or multiple discovery. It is entirely possible for two people (or more) to reach the same conclusion without interacting. One example of this is how ancient societies developed agriculture independent of each other.

Please do go through the sources I have listed as they cover the entire article. Also, the editorial process at many international publications is very thorough and they check submissions before publishing. So, one cannot copy posts verbatim and present them in shape of an article.

Finally, I would like to respectfully say to all forum members here that you guys are most probably better aware of military matters than I am. Please do critique what I have written but kindly refrain from accusing me of stealing posts.

Thank You

Don't worry about it.

Anyways, about your piece. It's clear you're leaning towards using the JH-7A as a naval bomb truck, but realize that such a course has drawbacks.

First, it means setting up an entire logistics chain for an aircraft with a limited role. In theory, things work out clearly (e.g., 'well for air-to-air there's PL-15'), but what if that missile doesn't hit and a Flanker or Rafale gets too close? So, was it worth it? And what was the opportunity cost (i.e., where could've those funds gone instead)?

Second, it's worth looking into whether the PN already has bomb truck-like programs in the pipeline. It does: the LRMPA. This is functionally a bomb truck, albeit for hunting submarines and knocking out ships, but it'll do so far away from contested air space and aerial threats. You should see if it'd be possible to deploy ALCMs from LRMPAs.

Third, if it's a case of a naval fighter arm, you should study whether it's feasible to loop the PN into Project AZM (i.e., the PAF's NGFA/FGFA) and if it can also order 2-3 squadrons.

 

[nascar 42]

Don't worry about it.

Anyways, about your piece. It's clear you're leaning towards using the JH-7A as a naval bomb truck, but realize that such a course has drawbacks.

First, it means setting up an entire logistics chain for an aircraft with a limited role. In theory, things work out clearly (e.g., 'well for air-to-air there's PL-15'), but what if that missile doesn't hit and a Flanker or Rafale gets too close? So, was it worth it? And what was the opportunity cost (i.e., where could've those funds gone instead)?

Second, it's worth looking into whether the PN already has bomb truck-like programs in the pipeline. It does: the LRMPA. This is functionally a bomb truck, albeit for hunting submarines and knocking out ships, but it'll do so far away from contested air space and aerial threats. You should see if it'd be possible to deploy ALCMs from LRMPAs.

Third, if it's a case of a naval fighter arm, you should study whether it's feasible to loop the PN into Project AZM (i.e., the PAF's NGFA/FGFA) and if it can also order 2-3 squadrons.

Noted Sir. I shall look into this in detail.